Over 90% of the income gains in the first year of the recovery went to the top 1%

This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: Over 90% of the income gains in the first year of the recovery went to the top 1%

Which could mean that they think Romney will make a better President for the country which is, after all, good for business.
Which could mean they think Romney is going to beat Obama.
Which could mean they are repudiating Obama's crony capitalism.
Which could mean they think Obama is just incompetent.
Which could mean they are tired of giving money to an administration that demonizes them whenever they want to.

It doesnt have to mean what you think it does. It can mean a lot of things. It may not even mean what I think it does.

Re: Over 90% of the income gains in the first year of the recovery went to the top 1%

Originally Posted by JP Hochbaum

In 2010, average real income per family grew by 2.3% but the gains were very uneven. Top 1% incomes grew by 11.6%, while bottom 99% incomes grew only by 0.2%. Hence, the top 1% captured 93% of the income gains in the first year of recovery. Such an uneven recovery can help explain the recent public demonstrations against inequality.

The 10 page update offers a clear picture of how income shares have varied over different business cycles, as well as the long-term trends since 1917. Top income shares fell dramatically after World War II, stayed flat, then began to rise in the early 1980s and have returned to their pre-War levels.

The top 10% in the US take now take home about 47% of all income, but this is driven by the top 1% who account for 20%.

The difference between the business cycle of the 1990s and the 2000s is that the incomes of the bottom 99% grew by 20% between 1993 and 2000, but only by 6.8% between 2002 and 2007.

Saez suggests that this may help explain why the dramatic growth in top incomes during the Clinton administration did not generate much public outcry while there has been a great level of attention to top incomes in the press and in the public debate since 2005.

If the 99% percent wasnt giving over 90% of the money to the 1% then you wouldn't see these types of numbers. The rich isn't stealing it from the poor, the poor are lining up and giving it to the rich.

Re: Over 90% of the income gains in the first year of the recovery went to the top 1%

Originally Posted by muciti

If the 99% percent wasnt giving over 90% of the money to the 1% then you wouldn't see these types of numbers. The rich isn't stealing it from the poor, the poor are lining up and giving it to the rich.

Re: Over 90% of the income gains in the first year of the recovery went to the top 1%

I DO so love the class warfare schtick. Remind me again how the rich are 'stealing' from the poor...and remind me again how even taking every penny from the rich is suddenly going to make the miserable pathetic failures that couldnt be bothered to prepare for their future suddenly successful...or even better off...and who exactly it is that is going to employ them...

Re: Over 90% of the income gains in the first year of the recovery went to the top 1%

I DO so love the class warfare schtick. Remind me again how the rich are 'stealing' from the poor...and remind me again how even taking every penny from the rich is suddenly going to make the miserable pathetic failures that couldnt be bothered to prepare for their future suddenly successful...or even better off...and who exactly it is that is going to employ them...

I would love to see some proof that all the poor waste their money like that.

And no one here has said anything about taking anything from the rich.

Just curious...ever actually BEEN in poor neighborhoods or are you just one of those upwardly mobile liberals that pretend to actually care about the poor but couldnt actually find them with a map and 2 instructor assists?

Just curious...ever actually BEEN in poor neighborhoods or are you just one of those upwardly mobile liberals that pretend to actually care about the poor but couldnt actually find them with a map and 2 instructor assists?

I live in one of the poorest areas of Chicago. Now supply a study that shows that peoples incomes are wasted on those items, or move on with another argument that could actually be proven.

You need to widen your resource library a bit. There are tons of resources on this sort of argument, you need to actually make an effort to look for them. Im sure there are pro and con studys, but to argue that there are none is not a smart argument.

You need to widen your resource library a bit. There are tons of resources on this sort of argument, you need to actually make an effort to look for them. Im sure there are pro and con studys, but to argue that there are none is not a smart argument.

Re: Over 90% of the income gains in the first year of the recovery went to the top 1%

Originally Posted by JP Hochbaum

I live in one of the poorest areas of Chicago. Now supply a study that shows that peoples incomes are wasted on those items, or move on with another argument that could actually be proven.

Then you really SHOULD get out of the house more. Go check out your nearest behavioral health units, emergency rooms, Domestic Violence shelters and treatment centers. Amazing how many people with no income for several years are still pack a day smokers and manage to access alcohol and illegal drugs. Check out stats on reservations. Comorbid diagnosis of mental D/O, DV, SA, all relatively common in low income communities, regardless of country of study. Of course...this just all feeds your argument that the rich are stealing from the poor...
"Tobacco smoking, alcohol, cannabis and polysubstance use are common behaviors among young adults, particularly those experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage. Interventions aiming to decrease substance abuse and reduce socioeconomic inequalities in this area should be implemented early in life."